Introducing Center Stage 2M

Seriously, these footers are not Magico speakers.
It's unlikely to break anyone's bank who visits Whatsbest forum.

A set of these are much cheaper than most cables people here use.

And there's the generous money back guarantee.

They absolutely work magic for my system.
I don't see why people won't just give it a try.
I am not saying CS2 is the best footers in the world, I haven't tried them all.
But if even on a simplistic system like mine, they work.

I can only imagine the amount of magic these will do on some of the even better systems..

David.
 
Seriously, these footers are not Magico speakers.
It's unlikely to break anyone's bank who visits Whatsbest forum.

A set of these are much cheaper than most cables people here use.

And there's the generous money back guarantee.

They absolutely work magic for my system.
I don't see why people won't just give it a try.
I am not saying CS2 is the best footers in the world, I haven't tried them all.
But if even on a simplistic system like mine, they work.

I can only imagine the amount of magic these will do on some of the even better systems..

David.
Great to hear they work for you.a lot of footers just seem to change the sound and some actually improve sound quality.
 
Unless you use the exact sample speaker, same cable, have the space, same power, same hifi-rack, otherwise you are not hearing whatever the component maker is hearing.
Does that mean you need to get the exact same setup as the component maker, in order to hear what the component really sounds like?
And, does it really matter?
And if does, which component will you base your system on?

Music is all about personal taste, and if adding footers change the component sound, but it suits your personal taste.

I believe that's more important than anything else.

Okay, but not related to my post about stock footers having a sonic signature.

Did you know you can list your system in your profile and/or signature?
 
Okay, but not related to my post about stock footers having a sonic signature.

Did you know you can list your system in your profile and/or signature?
Not sure why my system is relevant.
But I have entered it anyways.

Depends on how you define sonic signature.

The CS2 doesn't add color to a sound, it just reduces noise, and increases musicality.
There's no analogue signals going through the footers.
It doesn't add color to the sound.
It takes away the noise, it lets you hear what your component could actually do.
Other footers try to do the same thing, CS2 just manages to do it better for me.
 
Last edited:
I frankly don't know why Joe, Steve and others are questioning those who believe that the long term value of a product has been inadvertently (prematurely?) diminished on a product that is on its third iteration in four years. It is a very valid question given the cost of the product with no upgrade path. For those with disposable income, it probably isn't a problem. And I don't "hate" you Joe or anyone else for that matter. Wasted energy. Resale value notwithstanding, I'm sorry that you can't understand this basic, justifiable concern.
OK. You are not asking a question. You are making a statement. Your statement is nothing more than your opinion. Your opinion has no basis in fact. By asserting an opinion that has no basis in fact (because you have no experience with the product) and presenting it as if it were true, you are attaching a negative fiction to CS2M and opening CS2M to public debate and ridicule based on a priori bullshit. I find this egregious, and I am sorry you can’t see that your comments don’t belong on this thread. I do think, however, there are probably a few threads on this forum where your comments would be 100% appropriate, assuming you know something about the product. Your comments belong there.
 
Hi Joe,

Sorry I forgot to ask in my last post if you happen to know which size would be appropriate / you would recommend for a dCs Bartók and for a Gryphon Diablo 300?
I'm gonna ask my dealer if he can lend me some to demo,

Kind regards

Stephane
 
Hi Joe,

Sorry I forgot to ask in my last post if you happen to know which size would be appropriate / you would recommend for a dCs Bartók and for a Gryphon Diablo 300?
I'm gonna ask my dealer if he can lend me some to demo,

Kind regards

Stephane
If I could suggest, I would recommend CS2M 1.5 under the Gryphon and CS2M 1.0 under the DCS which I am assuming is a standalone DAC rather than the integrated
 
  • Like
Reactions: _Alchemist_
A Daily Diary Reflecting My Settle In Experience Using The New CS2M Footers

I thought that this thread would be a good place for me to blog my daily findings using all new CS2M footers in my system

With the help of my wife, yesterday I removed 10 sets of CS2 1.0 footers from my front end electronics and 6 sets of CS2 1.5 footers from my amplifier and its 2 se.parate power supplies

I have always advocated doing an A-B-A test to understand what the Center Stage footers bring to a system and yesterday was no exception. I have always said that the placement and removal of these footers always goes best when you have an extra set of hands especially if your equipment is heavy

I have a play list of about 30 songs that I use to highlight aspects of things I look for in the music starting from simple vocals and moving on through more complex pieces until finally large symphonics.

I played many of the songs and once done I powered the system down and removed 64 footers from under my components.My wife is skilled at the process as this is at least the 8th or 9th time that I have done this experiment. The system was then powered up and I listened once again with stock feet of all components. What I heard made me smile as the effect of a system completely supported with CS footers became immediately evident when listening now. The sound stage was side to side reaching the speakers but in comparison to what I just heard the sound now could only best be described as 2 dimensional there was a complete collapse of everything in the soundstage. The immersive effect I had before was gone. Tonality was ok but nowhere near what I had before. My system sounded subdued. The dynamic, timbre and tonality I had with the footers was gone

We were able to insert the 64 new CS2M footers under all components in about 45 minutes and then the system was powered up and allowed to warm up and I sat down to listen

I played the same songs over again . I can say out of the box it was initially sounding like a completely different system and while I was trying to wrap my head around what I was hearing the bottom literally fell out and my system never sounded so bad.
Yesterday I was saying to bobbin that these footers bring tonality, dynamics and a visceral emotion. This was totally gone. The top end was rolled off and the bottom octave was gone. The bass was loose, tubby and slow. It seemed as if the system was having difficulty keeping up.

So within the first half hour this is how I could describe what II was hearing
System seemed sluggish, slow and having difficulty keeping up
Loose tubby bass
Rolled off top end
Absence of bottom octave ..bass was woefully bad
Sound stage seems two dimensional compared to before
Listening to male singers with low deep voices revealed a rattling in their voices
Steve Nix Voice was unrecognizable
Leonard Cohen's voice was unlistenable and was rattled and garbled
Playing passages with female singers at the listening levels that I always used seemed so loud that I felt as if my ears were bleeding

At this point I had to leave the room. I did keep the music playing and returned 90 minutes later

I have said since the CS2 was released that my settle in period seems to be quicker than other users and the only plausible (but unsubstantiated) reason could be that all of my CS feet are sitting on Joe's CMS platforms. So what heard this time caught me completely by surprise.........

At 2 hours in a great deal of the dynamics had returned
The mid range was now not only listenable but the garbled male and female voices was gone. Stevie Nix and Leonard Cohen were now sounding right
What also impressed me was the mid bass was now much tighter and very listenable even though the bottom octave was still absent
Dynamics were back in a very good way
Initially the 2D soundstage was restricted to a narrow space between the speakers. There was no extension of the soundstage laterally when I first began to listen but at 2 hours the sound stage was now reaching both inner sides of the speakers
There was still no immersive effect at all

My other caveat was when I inserted the LS 1.5's under my speakers, the settle in process was 3-7 days and I attributed this to a different technology than what was in the CS2. Well FWIW, the CS2M is based on trickle down technology from the LS series and I can only speculate that the reason I was beginning to hear sonic changes after 2 hours was perhaps due to the LS DNA in these CS2M feet. However that is conjecture on my part

So I sat for there next 2 hours and listened and I could hear changes happening as I played my demo tracks. That shocked me

So what does this prove......well again it shows that settle in with these feet are the same as with the CS2 feet .....IOW settle in is truly system dependent. I have clients whose feet settle in 7-10 days and others at least a month a longer

The key to Center Stage feet is the degradation process. If you hear degradation, it means these feet are working and DON'T TOUCH THEM because if you do you start all over. Leave them alone. Once the degradation starts the settling has begun and in a few days everyone will begin to experience their own epiphany as one day it will see as if the clouds have parted and suddenly you are listening to a new system

My initial impression so far is that these feet do have different DNA as they sound different somewhat from the CS2. However before I make any comments more listening is due today. My system is warming up as I type my day One findings. Please be advised that my settle might be entirely different from every one. These are system dependent so "be patient little grasshopper.;)

Stay tuned for today's findings.
 
Yes - I agree with that, particularly when it comes to 'footer devices' put under components. My theory/opinion: when a generic or one-fits-all footer reaches its own maximum resonant frequency it directs its energy into what it sits on, resulting in more complex mechanical energy in the component itself.

For many (not all) this will change what is heard, change the sound of the component and often the 'new' sound is obviously different from that of the component without the device. Whether different translates to improvement is the customer's to decide. Typically the new excitement wears off and by then another revolutionary footer comes on the scene to try. Very few footers are upgradeable and the market churns.

Occasionally/rarely you'll find a manufacturer who includes a third-party footer with their component. And the sound of that, coming from the manufacturer is his component's sound. Some manufacturers offer their own devices as complementary add-ons - Wilson and Shunyata come to mind. Otherwise, the majority of manufacturers do not think adding a third party footer is necessary to complete their product. (I believe this is different for platforms and racks.)

What is somewhat baffling to me is the scenario where footers are added to some pretty pricey gear. Someone adds brand X footer under their $150k Wadax box. They no longer hear the component they bought as it was designed. Did it need to be fixed? Does the brand X footer manufacturer know the secret to unlocking the 'true sound' of the Wadax box? Why not choose a component whose sound you prefer in the first place.
Hi Tima

I don’t think we’ve met previously. Thank you for posting this. If you don’t mind, here are a few of my thoughts.

Your opinion in paragraph 1 is correct as written, imo. In addition, footers disappoint because they fail to mitigate mechanical energy across their “operative” bandwidth evenly . In better words, prior to reaching their resonant frequency they let vibration pass unevenly in bandwidths they “should” be able to handle. Bad design is what I would call this.

I think paragraph 2 is spot on in its entirety.

With respect to Paragraph 3, I think most manufacturers don’t want to mess with after market designs because of the points you raised in paragraph 1, and doing so is not necessary to sell their equipment. FWIW, Soulution uses our footers on all of their products, as does Karan Acoustics. I stopped offering our footers OEM a while ago because of bad experiences with manufacturers…….and I am one! Go figure.

I have to disagree with your final paragraph with respect to our feet. To repeat, only with respect to our feet. We try very hard NOT to change the sound of the component. We are laser focused on revealing a components true design potential and getting out of the way of its performance otherwise.
 
I am not making that a not a paid commentary that gets 50/60% off the prices to state that V2 or V3 is even better than what was perfect with V1.

send me some of these amazing footers that take 14 days to settle ( for your ears to get used to the sound) before you are allowed to comment on the SQ - but don't dare remove them as you go back to nothing.

I am a reasonable man and happy to be proven wrong.
It should make you fell relieved to know that the guys I chose for beta testers for CS2M, can't be bought. Steve has an investment in his set up of probably around $1M. Russ is about $500k. Marty is in the same ball park. None of them will tolerate crap in their systems. If it isn't good, it's gone.

You could talk to Steve about trying the feet. He can help you decide where to start. Send them back to me personally if you don't like them. Who knows, you might be pleasantly surprised.

We are all reasonable men. :)
 
A Daily Diary Reflecting My Settle In Experience Using The New CS2M Footers

I thought that this thread would be a good place for me to blog my daily findings using all new CS2M footers in my system

With the help of my wife, yesterday I removed 10 sets of CS2 1.0 footers from my front end electronics and 6 sets of CS2 1.5 footers from my amplifier and its 2 se.parate power supplies

I have always advocated doing an A-B-A test to understand what the Center Stage footers bring to a system and yesterday was no exception. I have always said that the placement and removal of these footers always goes best when you have an extra set of hands especially if your equipment is heavy

I have a play list of about 30 songs that I use to highlight aspects of things I look for in the music starting from simple vocals and moving on through more complex pieces until finally large symphonics.

I played many of the songs and once done I powered the system down and removed 64 footers from under my components.My wife is skilled at the process as this is at least the 8th or 9th time that I have done this experiment. The system was then powered up and I listened once again with stock feet of all components. What I heard made me smile as the effect of a system completely supported with CS footers became immediately evident when listening now. The sound stage was side to side reaching the speakers but in comparison to what I just heard the sound now could only best be described as 2 dimensional there was a complete collapse of everything in the soundstage. The immersive effect I had before was gone. Tonality was ok but nowhere near what I had before. My system sounded subdued. The dynamic, timbre and tonality I had with the footers was gone

We were able to insert the 64 new CS2M footers under all components in about 45 minutes and then the system was powered up and allowed to warm up and I sat down to listen

I played the same songs over again . I can say out of the box it was initially sounding like a completely different system and while I was trying to wrap my head around what I was hearing the bottom literally fell out and my system never sounded so bad.
Yesterday I was saying to bobbin that these footers bring tonality, dynamics and a visceral emotion. This was totally gone. The top end was rolled off and the bottom octave was gone. The bass was loose, tubby and slow. It seemed as if the system was having difficulty keeping up.

So within the first half hour this is how I could describe what II was hearing
System seemed sluggish, slow and having difficulty keeping up
Loose tubby bass
Rolled off top end
Absence of bottom octave ..bass was woefully bad
Sound stage seems two dimensional compared to before
Listening to male singers with low deep voices revealed a rattling in their voices
Steve Nix Voice was unrecognizable
Leonard Cohen's voice was unlistenable and was rattled and garbled
Playing passages with female singers at the listening levels that I always used seemed so loud that I felt as if my ears were bleeding

At this point I had to leave the room. I did keep the music playing and returned 90 minutes later

I have said since the CS2 was released that my settle in period seems to be quicker than other users and the only plausible (but unsubstantiated) reason could be that all of my CS feet are sitting on Joe's CMS platforms. So what heard this time caught me completely by surprise.........

At 2 hours in a great deal of the dynamics had returned
The mid range was now not only listenable but the garbled male and female voices was gone. Stevie Nix and Leonard Cohen were now sounding right
What also impressed me was the mid bass was now much tighter and very listenable even though the bottom octave was still absent
Dynamics were back in a very good way
Initially the 2D soundstage was restricted to a narrow space between the speakers. There was no extension of the soundstage laterally when I first began to listen but at 2 hours the sound stage was now reaching both inner sides of the speakers
There was still no immersive effect at all

My other caveat was when I inserted the LS 1.5's under my speakers, the settle in process was 3-7 days and I attributed this to a different technology than what was in the CS2. Well FWIW, the CS2M is based on trickle down technology from the LS series and I can only speculate that the reason I was beginning to hear sonic changes after 2 hours was perhaps due to the LS DNA in these CS2M feet. However that is conjecture on my part

So I sat for there next 2 hours and listened and I could hear changes happening as I played my demo tracks. That shocked me

So what does this prove......well again it shows that settle in with these feet are the same as with the CS2 feet .....IOW settle in is truly system dependent. I have clients whose feet settle in 7-10 days and others at least a month a longer

The key to Center Stage feet is the degradation process. If you hear degradation, it means these feet are working and DON'T TOUCH THEM because if you do you start all over. Leave them alone. Once the degradation starts the settling has begun and in a few days everyone will begin to experience their own epiphany as one day it will see as if the clouds have parted and suddenly you are listening to a new system

My initial impression so far is that these feet do have different DNA as they sound different somewhat from the CS2. However before I make any comments more listening is due today. My system is warming up as I type my day One findings. Please be advised that my settle might be entirely different from every one. These are system dependent so "be patient little grasshopper.;)

Stay tuned for today's findings.
Thank you for posting this. I am very interested in what improvements (hopefully) occur in your system.
 
It should make you fell relieved to know that the guys I chose for beta testers for CS2M, can't be bought. Steve has an investment in his set up of probably around $1M. Russ is about $500k. Marty is in the same ball park. None of them will tolerate crap in their systems. If it isn't good, it's gone.

You could talk to Steve about trying the feet. He can help you decide where to start. Send them back to me personally if you don't like them. Who knows, you might be pleasantly surprised.

We are all reasonable men. :)

Hi Joe, You are implying here that Steve, Russ, and Marty were your three beta testers for the CS2M footers. If that is the case, wouldn’t Steve already know what the footers sound like in his system? From his recent post, it seems as though he’s hearing them for the first time in his system.
 
My Day Two Observations with New CS2M's under all of my components

I preface my comments by reminding all that I am an all tube system and so to reserve tube life I rune the system only 8 hours per day
Typically I am playing the same demo disk throughout these 8 hours

So on day 2 after some shock yesterday that there was system sonic improvement beginning by hour number two. My gut instinct was that these feet were going to settle quicker than expected as well as all together as a complete system. To remind readers I inserted 64 new CS2M feet under my electronics (24 CS2m I 1.5 and 40 CS2M 1.0)

Well today I sat down for a listen in the final 30 minutes as I always do.

There was amazing improvement that made the listening enjoyable albeit still some what recessed.I am going to once again insert my findings as bullet points only

. Mid range much improved but recessed still

.still lacks upper and lower octaves, so rolled off top and bottom although not as much as yesterday

. Soundstage today completely fills the area between my speakers

.Soundstage becoming more 3D as it is still recessed but forward from yesterday

.Drums are tighter but still no snap due to loss of bottom octave

.If I could put a word to what I was hearing, "polite" comes to mind

.Tonality is improving but overall the sound remains lean at the top and bottom ends

. A striking improvement was much better focus as the imaging was almost spot on, The warbling I heard yesterday was gone

. Still NO Immersive Effect but soundstage well contained within the speakers.

. Because the sound is recessed I no longer feel as close to the music as I did before however as stated there is depth to the sound
stage

. What really has me amazed today is that the bleeding from my ears yesterday was almost certainly as a result of playing the same music at the exact same SPL as I did with the CS2. I discovered today that the sound stage is so low or absent that I have had to reduce the gain on my preamp by 3 clicks (each click is 0.3 Db)

So in summary , although I'm only hearing part of the sound as the top and bottom ends are still absent, the mid range was well focused and very beautiful

Based on what I heard today , reminds me of the settle in when I put LS 1.5's under my speakers. The settle in was 90% by day 3 and virtually complete by day 7. Again SETTLE IN WITH CENTER STAGE IS SYSTEM SPECIFIC and this is what I am hearing in my system. I say this because I am wondering if I am going to find the same with these feet as they are based on LS trickle down

I do sense that these feet will settle quicker.

More thoughts tomorrow
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ron Resnick
Hi Joe, You are implying here that Steve, Russ, and Marty were your three beta testers for the CS2M footers. If that is the case, wouldn’t Steve already know what the footers sound like in his system? From his recent post, it seems as though he’s hearing them for the first time in his system.

Probably difference between testing one or two sets on particular components.

Steve's recent post has been about replacing his whole system with them.
Steve now has 64 of them, that's definitely not "beta testing", lol
 
Probably difference between testing one or two sets on particular components.

Steve's recent post has been about replacing his whole system with them.
Steve now has 64 of them, that's definitely not "beta testing", lol
That’s exactly the case. We were each sent a set of 1.0 and a set of 1.5.
my daily posts are now what I am hearing with my entire system sitting on CS2M and the settle in
 
Hi Tima

I don’t think we’ve met previously. Thank you for posting this. If you don’t mind, here are a few of my thoughts.

Your opinion in paragraph 1 is correct as written, imo. In addition, footers disappoint because they fail to mitigate mechanical energy across their “operative” bandwidth evenly . In better words, prior to reaching their resonant frequency they let vibration pass unevenly in bandwidths they “should” be able to handle. Bad design is what I would call this.

I think paragraph 2 is spot on in its entirety.

With respect to Paragraph 3, I think most manufacturers don’t want to mess with after market designs because of the points you raised in paragraph 1, and doing so is not necessary to sell their equipment. FWIW, Soulution uses our footers on all of their products, as does Karan Acoustics. I stopped offering our footers OEM a while ago because of bad experiences with manufacturers…….and I am one! Go figure.

I have to disagree with your final paragraph with respect to our feet. To repeat, only with respect to our feet. We try very hard NOT to change the sound of the component. We are laser focused on revealing a components true design potential and getting out of the way of its performance otherwise.

Hi Joe,

Thanks for reading my post and confirming some of its points. I understand your goal not to change the sound of the component but rather '"get out of its way".

I don't understand the explanation/theory offered about how the CMS footer works, re entropy, etc. But that's okay. I assume its intent, broadly, is similar to that of most footer devices, namely to reduce the impact of mechanical energy on the operation of the component. Different designs can yield different sonic results.

My rudimentary understanding: Most vibration management devices face two broad concerns: i) isolate a component from external vibrations - largely floor born, and ii) enable or encourage a path for internal energy to leave the component. Internal mechanical energy can be what the component itself generates during its operation or it can be what is induced into the component by sound waves, connecting wires, etc.

This suggests to me two systems, one for isolation and one for mitigation or damping. The former faces the outside world, the latter the component itself.

Does any of this correlate with how your new CMS footer works?
Will the various effects recounted by Steve or Russ depend on what the footer sits upon or on the physical composition/design of the component itself?
 
  • Like
Reactions: delphi17
That’s exactly the case. We were each sent a set of 1.0 and a set of 1.5.
my daily posts are now what I am hearing with my entire system sitting on CS2M and the settle in

Steve, Which two components did you choose to put your beta CS2M footers under? Are you finding your current experience with all the new footers any different in terms of either sound or settling period?
 
Hi Joe,

Thanks for reading my post and confirming some of its points. I understand your goal not to change the sound of the component but rather '"get out of its way".

I don't understand the explanation/theory offered about how the CMS footer works, re entropy, etc. But that's okay. I assume its intent, broadly, is similar to that of most footer devices, namely to reduce the impact of mechanical energy on the operation of the component. Different designs can yield different sonic results.

My rudimentary understanding: Most vibration management devices face two broad concerns: i) isolate a component from external vibrations - largely floor born, and ii) enable or encourage a path for internal energy to leave the component. Internal mechanical energy can be what the component itself generates during its operation or it can be what is induced into the component by sound waves, connecting wires, etc.
I think the notion of reducing entropy is underrated or perhaps under-understood in our industry. It is certainly an area of flagrant underachievement and blatant overpromise. And this goes directly to your thoughtful post.

This suggests to me two systems, one for isolation and one for mitigation or damping. The former faces the outside world, the latter the component itself.

Does any of this correlate with how your new CMS footer works?
Will the various effects recounted by Steve or Russ depend on what the footer sits upon or on the physical composition/design of the component itself?
While your assumption of CS2Ms intent is broadly (to steal your word) correct, I don’t see much similarity to other footer devices. I don’t know of any that implement 1st Law impedance mismatching and 2nd Law entropy reduction to the extent we do. There’s significant focus on material science, e.g., thin rod speeds and elastic modulus and sequencing and (with CS2M) additive and subtractive damping.

We’ve gotten so precise about the effect of our products on components, we can move vocals forward or backward in the soundstage, change the relative volume levels and size of instruments around the center image and, in the end, lock it all down in proper proportions using processes applied to the foot in increments of 10/thousandths of an inch. Now, I don't mean to say we are fiddling with the performance of the component to make it do something it shouldn't. What I am saying, and I want to be clear about this, is that we are modifying the way we build the foot to make it get out of the way of the performance in the recorded material and the electronic component's design potential. One of the major flaws of footers is that they impose an unnatural thumbprint on the component and the recorded material. We work hard to drop the noise floor without doing this.

You could add, iii) canceling out the noise of the foot (device) to your list.

So, the execution of the concepts you broadly outline is quite complex, and yes, it correlates with CS2M although the CS2 concept tilts heavily toward the 2nd Law rather than 1st. 1st Law generally governs rack and component support systems.

Yes, and yes, are the answers to your last sentence. The settling period is always system and component specific.

I hope this helps you understand CS2M a bit better.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu